MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W127141261 · doi:10.2172/892299

Exclusive interactions in p$\bar{p}$ collisions at √s = 1.96 TeV

2006· report· en· W127141261 on OpenAlexaff
A. Hamilton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsObservableNuclear physicsParticle physicsBar (unit)Production (economics)Event (particle physics)DetectorColliderFermi Gamma-ray Space TelescopeMonte Carlo methodPair productionStatisticsAstrophysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents two exclusive production processes in p$\bar{p}$ collisions at √s = 1.96 TeV, using the Collider Detector Facility at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. An observation of exclusive e+e- production through γγ → e+e- is presented, as well as evidence for exclusive production of γγ through gg → γγ (via a quark loop). The exclusive e+e- production observation is based on 16 candidate events, with a background estimate of 2.1$+0.7\atop{-0.3}$. Each event has an e+e- pair (ET (e) > 5 GeV, |η(e)| < 2) and nothing else observable in the CDF detector. The measured cross section is 1.6$+0.5\atop{-0.3}$(stat) ± 0.3(sys) pb, while the predicted cross section is 1.711 ± 0.008 pb. The kinematic properties of the events are consistent with the predictions of the LPAIR Monte Carlo. The evidence for exclusive γγ production consists of 3 candidate events, with a background estimate of 0.0$+0.2\atop{-0.0}$ events. Each event has two photons (ETγ) > 5 GeV, |η(γ)| < 1 and nothing else observable in the CDF detector. The measured cross section for these events is 0.14$+0.14\atop{-0.04}$(stat) ± (sys) pb. It agrees with the theoretical prediction of 0.04 pb with a factor 3 to 5 theoretical uncertainty.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207